Picked up a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 -- who else has one?

Carsten Bockermann posted some really helpful test results from the

new Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens <a

href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Cs8P">in

this thread</a>, but still most of the results and discussion of it

I've seen on the Net are from the Canon model, so I thought this might

help anyone who's interested.

<p>

I couldn't resist, so I picked one up today and will be shooting the

heck out of it this week to see if it's a keeper. Initial impressions

are very good, and I have seen none of the autofocus problems a few

Canon users have reported (some of which was very likely user error).

<p>

<a

href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/carpeicthus/tags/sigma30mmf14dc/">The

results from this lens on a D70s are here.</a> This section will

continue to grow as I shoot more.

<p>

<a

href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/carpeicthus/tags/sigma30mmf14dc/"><img

src="http://photos23.flickr.com/29328750_f7a714de22_m.jpg" width="240"

height="160" alt="Sigma 30 f/1.4 test: Sharpness, bokeh" /></a>

<p>

Are there any other early adopters? I'd like to see a broader range of

Nikon responses to see if there are any quality-control issues on this

model.

Mine shipped today!

Great! Post some results when you get them!

based on what I can see on my monitor... seems sharp, and I agree, the bokeh is preferable to bokeh from a 50/1.8 (or just about any 50mm).

 

Was this shot at f1.4? If not, can you post samples shot at f1.4?

Unless the Sigma is demonstrably better at f/2 than the Nikon 35mm f/2 AF-D (and can perform well at f/1.4) then I cannot see the point of spending more money for a larger, heavier lens.

 

I am not anti-Sigma (I use a Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC on my D70) but will wait for a while to see the negative responses to this lens before deciding. There are some fast lenses that are hopeless until stopped down and there are a few that can perform wide open. Lets see which this is first.

I would like to see a 1:1 crop in the corner wide open.

This was shot at 1.4. The EXIF data is posted with all the photos (in the lower-right corner), but since I'm testing it, anything that looks shot wide willl have been shot FULLY wide.

 

I tried the 35 f/2. It's a fine lens but there's a lo of functionality overlap with my 50. As you can see, performance is pretty good at 1.4.

 

Carsten's link has center and corner crops. I'm not interested in technocratic tests as much as "does this take goood photos"? Also, be careful with corner crops that the lens was actually focused on that depth. At 1.4 shooting a wall, if the center of the wall is in focus, the corners of the wall, being farther away, are going to be outside the focal plane.

Actually, I believe that most top lenses exhibit a flat field of focus, so that entire wall should be in focus. A curved field of focus is sometimes the symptom of some lesser lenses.

<i>

"A curved field of focus is sometimes the symptom of some lesser lenses."

</i>

<p>

It's more common than you think, especially with fast glass. The Nikkor 35/1.4 AIS has substantial curvature to the plane of focus wide open. To some it's a 'defect', to others it's part of the signature of the lens that helps it isolate the subject.